Have to say it is these sorts of articles that grab most of my attention these days. Far more interesting that some boring lawyer did this or that.
The Justice Gap writes
In the 21st Century, there are growing numbers of turban wearing Sikhs in all fields of employment in the United Kingdom. A lot of Sikhs had to struggle and make sacrifices for the generation of Sikhs today. Gurpal Virdi on the history of the turban in the Metropolitan Police
In 1967, Herbert Wentworth Stotesbury of the Home Office wrote to the Commissioner of Metropolitan Police, Sir Joseph Simpson.
Ref: TRA/65 121/9/5
Dear Commissioner,
The Chief Constable of Birmingham has asked us whether he should allow a Sikh, who wishes to become a traffic warden in the city, to wear a turban instead of the regulation uniform cap. We are inclined to recommend to the Home Secretary that he should amend his determination of traffic wardens’ uniform to allow traffic wardens, who wish to do from religious convictions, to wear a suitable blue uniform turban with the metal distinguishing badge. We should, as usual, put the proposal first to the local authority association but it would be useful, at this stage, to know how you would view it.
It is a simple matter, in isolation, to decide that Sikh traffic wardens should be allowed to wear a turban, because this accords with practice in the armed services and in the colonial police forces. But in deciding that a turban would be suitable for a traffic warden, it is perhaps necessary to have in mind that a time may come when a Sikh applies to join the police force and asks to be allowed to wear a turban instead of a helmet. We think that we could deal with this question as a quite separate matter; and it may well be that when it arises, the recommendation which the Police Advisory Board committee on uniforms is going to make that for ordinary purpose the police uniform should be a cap instead of a helmet will make it easier to resolve.
I should be glad to know whether you share our view that we can cross the bridge of police turbans when we come to it (although it may not be too early to begin to think about how we should do so) and whether you yourself would see objection to suitable Sikh applicants for your traffic warden service wearing an appropriate uniform turban for religious reasons.
Yours sincerely
W. STOTESBURY
On 23rd November 1967, the Commissioner responded.
In reply to your letter under the above reference concerning Sikh traffic wardens my personal feeling is that it would be petty not to allow a Sikh who wished to do so to wear a turban on this duty. The presentation by the press of the row which arose in the Midlands a year or two back about bus conductors made everything look rather petty and I think we should avoid this sort of thing if we can. I am not aware of any request of this nature which has been made in London in our recruitment of wardens and I do not even know whether any Sikh has ever applied. It is possible that they have been told the conditions of service and the fact that they would have to wear caps and that somebody has withdrawn for this reason. I will do my best to find out whether this is the case and, if so, I will provide the supplementary information.
This is quite straightforward as it stands in isolation. But I am just as clear in my view about the possible extension of this to the police and in this respect I take the opposite view. Whatever the Uniform Committee may recommend to the Police advisory Board, I shall take a very strong stand on the wearing of helmets in London. I know that more and more men have got to wear caps when, for example, they drive Panda cars in the ordinary course of their duty buy I would not expect men detailed for duty in connection with demonstrations, etc. to be equipped in anything but helmets. This is necessary for protective reasons and, even more important, for identification. By that I mean identification by other officers who want to know who are police officers and where they are, often in a dense crowd and bad conditions of lighting, and equally important to ensure that the public have no doubt that a policeman is present. For this reason, if for no other, I should not want a Sikh policeman to appear under such circumstances in a turban. Even on ordinary duty I think there might be some embarrassment but I will not elaborate the arguments other than to say that I think the Police Service and significance of the uniform is very different matter from the public utility undertaking or a minor public service such as the Wardens’ service.
I realise that in the Armed Services turbans are worn under certain circumstances. Where there are mixed troops, as distinction from a Sikh Regiment, I do not know what the conditions are but I imagine that under battle conditions even the Sikh Infantryman is required to wear a steel helmet. How he does this, if in non-combative duties he wears a turban, I don’t know but we could look into this at somewhat greater leisure.
Yours sincerely
Commissioner
On 7th February 1969. Assistant Commissioner ‘D’, John Hill, writes to the Commissioner, Sir John Waldron.
Commissioner,
On other papers I am dealing with an application to join the Force from an Indian who is a Sikh, and normally wears a turban. The applicant is over normal age limit and there are other complications but these are best dealt with separately on the recruiting papers.
He has, however, raised the issue of the turban and it will be appropriate on this file to confirm or review the decision of your predecessor in his letter to Stotesbury on 23rd November 1967. The ruling now given will be given considerable importance to the Police Service and if it is against the wearing of a turban by a police officer, inevitably that decision will be contested, if not now, then on some future occasion.
There can be little doubt you may well disapprove the wearing of turbans on certain duties, e.g., whilst riding a motor cycle. But their unsuitability as headgear, except that they are not “uniform”, for wear by officers on normal foot duty is less clear. It can, for example, be argued the turban gives as much protection as the flat cap that so many of our men now wear.
On the other hand you may contend the turban provides inadequate protection, compared with the helmet, at demonstrations or when violence is feared. In this connexion even the adequacy of the helmet is questioned in some quarters.
The case is arguable, but it does seem that the wearing of the turban restricts the individual’s availability and suitability for all duties, – hitherto a pre-requisite for all entrants.
It will be unfortunate, however, if, as and when we do find suitable “immigrant” recruits for the Force, Sikhs are excluded for reasons other than their personal qualifications, or lack of same.
A.C. ‘D’
Read the full article at
